(That fakelore article is fascinating, thank you!)
Point taken. I was definitely simplifying down to this particular argument, where she has specifically said several times that she's not talking about authenticity of authorship but only of good research. But you are right that in the past she has pointed to an author's ethnicity is itself an important part of the political statement of the book. And I agree with you that that in and of itself is not problematic, but does mean I should step back from my assertion about what Debbie is asking for them. In the larger context of what people are used to seeing from Debbie when she posts on the list, authorial authenticity is definitely something she does ask for, even though she wasn't asking for it in the Kanell threads I was reading.
Last summer I was reading a fair amount of Native American literary criticism (for adult fiction and nonfiction), and I saw a fair amount in that area is being more protective of who has the right to tell those stories, in a way that I haven't seen that much of in Debbie's posts to the list or on Oyate (although there is a little bit of it in A Broken Flute). I don't know anything about Australian Aboriginal literature, so I don't know if the situation parallels. But I think the mistrust that might seem excessive to people coming from another culture is not just because the other culture comes from the long-standing tradition of written literature, I think there also is a huge element of white privilege there. Yes, there is definitely an oral versus written component, but there is also a huge component of who is allowed to succeed in society. Who is allowed to be portrayed as a contemporary person in the media and in literature. Whose stories get shelved in the religion section and whose get shelved in myth. Who has to have the ACLU sue the school system in federal court so that a five-year-old doesn't get educated alone in a separated classroom because he is wearing long hair according to his parents' religious beliefs. White privilege says we don't need to think about these things -- because that's what privilege is.
In other words, I agree with you that it's primarily a question of power relations, but while I think that an oral culture bumping up against illiterate one has a huge part of it, race is bigger.
no subject
Point taken. I was definitely simplifying down to this particular argument, where she has specifically said several times that she's not talking about authenticity of authorship but only of good research. But you are right that in the past she has pointed to an author's ethnicity is itself an important part of the political statement of the book. And I agree with you that that in and of itself is not problematic, but does mean I should step back from my assertion about what Debbie is asking for them. In the larger context of what people are used to seeing from Debbie when she posts on the list, authorial authenticity is definitely something she does ask for, even though she wasn't asking for it in the Kanell threads I was reading.
Last summer I was reading a fair amount of Native American literary criticism (for adult fiction and nonfiction), and I saw a fair amount in that area is being more protective of who has the right to tell those stories, in a way that I haven't seen that much of in Debbie's posts to the list or on Oyate (although there is a little bit of it in A Broken Flute). I don't know anything about Australian Aboriginal literature, so I don't know if the situation parallels. But I think the mistrust that might seem excessive to people coming from another culture is not just because the other culture comes from the long-standing tradition of written literature, I think there also is a huge element of white privilege there. Yes, there is definitely an oral versus written component, but there is also a huge component of who is allowed to succeed in society. Who is allowed to be portrayed as a contemporary person in the media and in literature. Whose stories get shelved in the religion section and whose get shelved in myth. Who has to have the ACLU sue the school system in federal court so that a five-year-old doesn't get educated alone in a separated classroom because he is wearing long hair according to his parents' religious beliefs. White privilege says we don't need to think about these things -- because that's what privilege is.
In other words, I agree with you that it's primarily a question of power relations, but while I think that an oral culture bumping up against illiterate one has a huge part of it, race is bigger.